Back
HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN (JODHPUR BENCH)
Mr. Justice Kuldeep Mathur, J
Shrawan Kumar – Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan – Respondent
Order :
1. This application for bail under Section 483 of BNSS has been filed by the petitioner who has been arrested in connection with F.I.R. No.188/2024 registered at Police Station Bhopalgarh (wrongly mentioned as Mathania in the impugned order dated 07.11.2024), District Jodhpur (Rural), for offences under Sections 8/22 of the NDPS Act.
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Public Prosecutor. Perused the material available on record.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that as per the prosecution, contraband (MD) weighing 114.80 gms. was recovered from the joint possession of the present petitioner and the co-accused persons namely Mahiram and Indrachand. Learned counsel submitted that petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case.
4. Drawing attention of the Court towards the FIR, learned counsel submitted that at the time when the petitioner was being searched by the seizure officer after complying with the provisions of the NDPS Act, contraband (MD) weighing 46.86 gms. was recovered from the right pocket of his trousers. Learned counsel further submitted that the FIR clearly indicates that the contraband recovered from the trousers of
The court established that recovery of contraband below commercial quantity can justify bail, even in cases of joint possession.
Possession of contraband below commercial quantity and absence of criminal antecedents can justify granting bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C.
The court granted bail based on the determination that the quantity of contraband supplied was below commercial threshold and the petitioner had no prior criminal antecedents.
Bail may be granted under the NDPS Act when the accused is not in direct possession of contraband and meets the twin conditions for bail.
The court granted bail based on insufficient evidence against the petitioner and the principle of parity with a co-accused already released on bail.
Bail may be granted when the accused is not in direct possession of contraband and there is no evidence of reoffending.
The court granted bail to the petitioner, finding insufficient grounds for continued detention based on the nature of the charges and comparison with a co-accused already granted bail.
The court granted bail due to insufficient evidence against the petitioner and the absence of any risk of fleeing or re-offending.
Bail granted based on lack of conscious possession of contraband and previous bail granted to co-accused, emphasizing the trial's expected duration.
Bail may be granted when the petitioner is not in possession of contraband and co-accused have been released, considering judicial custody and absence of criminal antecedents.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
